click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
disarmament. the reaganites in the defense department were horrified by this and put a stop to it but reagan didn't go all the way with reaganism when he had a chance to end the cold war, especially the nuclear threats. so it's a hard-core republican belief. if you remember the pup pup prime -- republican primaries of 2012, it was not that long ago there were eight or ten republican candidates in simi valley for a debate at the reagan library and every one of them said reagan set the example how maring be strong, reagan did with the soviet union and we should do it today in iran, we should do it -- we were right toy trite in iraq. america should use its power to achieve its spend destroy its enemies. i worked in the cold war and in the middle east. you have 29% of the american people agree with that today. >> richard, do you want to say something? you're leaning forward. >> no. >> okay. we want to take questions from the audience if anybody has a question, and i think there's a microphone somewhere that someone is going to bring up. why don't we start right up here on the aisle, blue shirt.
this at the library but he met with gorbachev and the almost agreed to nuclear disarmament. in the defense did redmon they were horrified by this and put a stop to it but he didn't go all the way when he had a chance to end the cold war especially the nuclear threat so you do find it's a hard core beliefs today if you remember the republican primaries of 2012 it was sent but long ago there were these republican candidates for the debate at the library and everyone said he sets the example of how america can be strong and use its power to defeat its enemies he did it with the soviet union and we should do it today in iran and we were right to try it in iraq. america should use its power to destroy its enemies. it worked in the cold war and will work in the middle east. you have about 29% of the american people that agree today. >> richard, did you want to say something? you're leaning forward. [laughter] >> we want to take questions from the audience and i think there is a microphone someone is going to bring up. why don't we start right up here >> it's obviously had an impact on politicians and indiv
officials after the 9/11 attack approved actions for cia and defense personnel based upon legal guidance that has since been repudiated. the most important decision may have been to declare the geneva convention did not apply to al-qaeda and taliban captives in afghanistan or guantanamo. the administration never specified what rules would apply instead. the task force believes that u.s. defense intelligence professionals and service members in harm's way need absolutely clear orders on the treatment of detainees, requiring at a minimum compliance with common article iii of the geneva convention. this was not done. civilian leaders and military commanders have an affirmative responsibility to insure that their subordinates comply with the laws of war. president obama has committed to observe the geneva conventions through an executive order, but a future president could change it by the stroke of a pen. congress, one of our recommendations, needs to work with the administration to strengthen the torture statute, the war crimes exact the uniform code of military justice to remove loopholes
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3